Peter Christensen wrote:
Under all circumstances, the patch is better than the one I was forced
to make myself in a hurry when I encountered the problem. I ended up not
using the real_escape version because I didn't have time to dig into how
the DB pool was working, and I didn't use the Octst
ECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Christensen
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 4:22 PM
To: Stipe Tolj
Cc: Kannel Development list; Rene Kluwen
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mysql_real_escape_string() usage in gw/dlr_mysql.c
Hi,
Under all circumstances, the patch is better than the one I was f
Hi,
Under all circumstances, the patch is better than the one I was forced
to make myself in a hurry when I encountered the problem. I ended up not
using the real_escape version because I didn't have time to dig into how
the DB pool was working, and I didn't use the Octstr struct.
This is also
Rene Kluwen wrote:
IMHO consuming DBPoolConns is not a bad thing. After all, that is why the
pool even exist. So consuming and producing sql connections is not so
expensive.
ok, that's true. The main issue is that in some circumstances you may need 2
connections for "one-and-the-same" job, wh
Stipe, list,
IMHO consuming DBPoolConns is not a bad thing. After all, that is why the
pool even exist. So consuming and producing sql connections is not so
expensive.
In your patch: Where exactly do you escpape the parameters to the sql
string? I couldnt find that so quick.
In most of the Chimi
